New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-06-30
JACOB SHARP CONVICTED.
a VERDICT ON THE FIRST BALLOT.
ONLY SEVENTEEN MINUTES TAKEN FOR
DELIBERATION.
RECOMMENDATION TO MERCY-MR. srICKNEYs
APPEAL FOR HIS CLIENT COLONEL FELLOWS
SUNS UP ELoQUENTLY FOR THE PROSE-
CUTIoS-HOw SHARP BORE THE AN
NOUNCFMENT OF THE DECISION,

NoUNCEMENT OF THE DECISION
"Gnilty of the crime charged" This was the
verdict delivered last night by the most competent
jury that Judge Barrett says ever sat before him.
In the of Jacob Sharp, charged with bribing
aud consDirng 10 bribe AL Alderman. When this
trial started on May 16, notwithstanding the fact
that several Of the Aldermen bribed by this defend
ant bad been found guilty and are now in Sing
Sing, and the admission on the part of the
defence that such bribery was committed by some
body, there were grave doubts in the public mind
that the corruptIng influence could be directly
traced to Mr.. Sharp Then the array of clever law
yers engaged for II defence strengt hened the idea
that If there any loophole offered by the law,
the defendant would certainly by their aid be able
~ creep thr ugh it,
The opening and first days of evidence for the
rosecuton-which did not begin until June 18, so
great was the care in the selection of jury -
did little TO shake this opinion, as Mr. Nicoll
himself stated that the prosecution had to rely
almost entirely on circumstantal evidence But
gradually. link by Ink, the chain of evidence
which bound Jake" Sharp to his fellows In
Sing sing and in Canada was skllfully connected,
and fairly clear case of quit was made out
against him. But there was the defence TO come,
and no one knew the surprises theybad in store
wherewIth to confound the Distrct-Attorney and
convince, or at least to perpex, the jury.
Mr. Parsons made an opening speech of nearly five
hours. aud il was disappointment to those who
believed that Sharp would escape, III that it
was little more than review OF the
evidence offered by the prosecution. The evidence
they were 10 adduce to clear the defendant was
scarcely alluded to, and the witnesses they called
were few and their evidence unimportaut. This
collapse Of the defence Occasioned great surprise
and led to a reverson Of public opinion, not as to
the guilt of the defendant but as to his probable
conviction for his crime Then yesterday morning
Mr. Stickney spoke for three hours for the defence
and his summing up OF the case was rather vnd-
cation thaa defence of tho actions his client
was charged with. Colonel Fellows summed
for the people in a speech Of five hours duration,
and Judge Barrett made a clear and carefully i'm
partial charge to the Jury which lasted two hours.
When the jury went out to consider their ver-
Dict the large crowd which filled every corner OF
the court room filed out Also in the belief that n
Gaze OF this Importance would take long delibera-
ton In the last TRIAL of the 5rIbed Aldermen, that
of Ceary. the jury were out seventeen hour', ana
IN the case of McQuade thirty niue hours. In Mr..
sharps case the jury came to decision
on the first ballot. There was no difference
of opinion among them In Just seyepteen ven len
charge they troOped back into the court room Win
a verdict Of guilty Of tho indictment baroed.'
Although the Nctcnce nau io't nope IN lnti c'i W
several days ago they appeared to he cast down by
the verdict, and the defendant especially was COM
pletcy dazcd by II.
ont of respect to his advanced age and feeble
health the Jury added TO their verdict recon-
mend tion TO mercy. But there were no demon
siratio1s IN The court room either in sympathy
with this kindly recommendation or at the general
result Of h. trial. -,
Judge Burrett remarked afterward that this
was far more important conviction IN respect 10
lis influence on public morality than even that or
Tweed The extreme penalty for such an offence
~ tha. Of which Sharp is found guilty is a fine OF
=. 900 or ten years IN State prson, or both, but
this case the jury's recommendation 10 mercy
will have much weight in mitigating the penalty.
Jachue, the first of the Aldermen tried
lor accepting a brib'. was sen sen
fenced 10 nine years and ten months; Nc
Quade to 81, 900 fine and seven years imprson-
ment O'Neil had a lighter sentence. owing 10 his
previous good character; and in Clearv's case the
jury disagreed. Sharp's counsel will make morton
on July i3 for trial, and after that the Dis
trlct- Attorney will continue his prosecution both
Of the bribcrs and the brbed, so far as they
can be reached